• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income

whysoserious said:
One of the biggest ways he can create domestic jobs is through building new infrastructure and upgrading old infrastructure - republicans will not allow this.
Click to expand...

It's like saying that we need to give Madoff another chance. He could have done that. He decided not to.
 
1Perry said:
It's like saying that we need to give Madoff another chance. He could have done that. He decided not to.
Click to expand...

When? He did that with stimulus spending a bit, but many of the republican states refused the money and, because of the lack of a super majority, there was quite a bit of compromise involved as well.
 
We have more government assitance programs than any time in our history. I think there is a corrrelation.
 
jambalaya said:
We have more government assitance programs than any time in our history. I think there is a corrrelation.
Click to expand...

Correlation does not imply causation for a reason. Not to mention, the idea that there are more poor people because we have more programs to help the poor is illogical.
 
whysoserious said:
When? He did that with stimulus spending a bit, but many of the republican states refused the money and, because of the lack of a super majority, there was quite a bit of compromise involved as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, it was all the GOP's fault that the program did virtually none of the things you say a stimulus bill should have done. :roll:

Sorry, Obama had his chance, he blew it by instead of infrastructure programs he decided to reward campaign donors. He isn't getting another chance to do the same expecially with elections approaching.
 
whysoserious said:
Correlation does not imply causation for a reason. Not to mention, the idea that there are more poor people because we have more programs to help the poor is illogical.
Click to expand...

Depends.
If those programs encourage changes in behavior, so that more people benefit from "living in poverty" than otherwise.
Not saying that is happening, but it's not necessarily illogical.
 
Risky Thicket said:
The government working with MSM, which is for all intents and purposes, a branch of the the federal government - and has been so for more than 15 years - has not yet declared the current economic crisis a depression, although it is.

Off the top of my head people I know who have been out of work for quiet a while now:

Newspaper reporter
advertising copywriter
videographers (4)
More IT people than I can count
electrical engineer
telecommunications (3)
real estate salesman
teachers (3)
headhunter
hearing aid dispenser
small business owner (5)

This is just off the top of my head, people I know personally who cannot find work. I know many more, we all do. The bull**** that the unemployed are lazy shows how far off the make some GOP politicos are. We are in a depression. Obama doesn't have the leadership ability or the man balls get this nation back on its feet. Ron Paul, maybe, I don't know.
Click to expand...

Presient Obama has been in office 3 years and you think the economy is his fault? I can not think of any thing scarier then Ron Paul in office especially if he could actually get any thing done.
 
Doesn't it kind of depend on the definition of "poverty?" I've seen homeless people with cell phones and portable TV's...

Also, the Federal Government doesn't count government assitance as "income." Someone could be on a half a dozen government programs and still be in poverty because they have a low income job.
 
Last edited:
What a surprise! The right is blaming the left and refusing to see any fault withing their own party. The left is blaming the right and refusing to see the fault in their own party. Try to see the bigger picture.

Keep blindly following a party and blaming the other side while endorsing a party who is just as to blame.

Furthermore, people need to stop crying and waiting for the government to fix things. Our economy is jacked up because of a lot more than political policies. People are poor because Americans as a whole refuse to support Americans and American businesses. You people are more to blame than Dems or Repubs.
 
The_Pilgrim said:
Doesn't it kind of depend on the definition of "poverty?" I've seen homeless people with cell phones and portable TV's...
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention the generators they use to charge these items, how many lets say out of a hundred homeless people would you say have cell phones and portable TV's

Also, the Federal Government doesn't count government assitance as "income." Someone could be on a half a dozen government programs and still be in poverty because they have a low income job.
Click to expand...

I am not saying you are incorrect but...Is this conjecture on your part or do you want to or can you supply a source
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Depends.
If those programs encourage changes in behavior, so that more people benefit from "living in poverty" than otherwise.
Not saying that is happening, but it's not necessarily illogical.
Click to expand...

Changing those programs to spur action and reward those who better themselves is not the same as cutting and dismantling them.
 
Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, questioned whether some people classified as poor or low-income actually suffer material hardship. He said that while safety-net programs have helped many Americans, they have gone too far. He said some people described as poor live in decent-size homes, drive cars and own wide-screen TVs.
Click to expand...

When I was 20 yrs old I would walk to work sometimes thumbing a ride. My job was 25 miles from where I lived with my folks. I did that for 3 months, part of which was in the winter. Plus I had the swing shift so by the time I got off I had to walk home in the dark...rarely did anyone stop to pick me up. Then I was able to get an apartment in town and a car which widened my ability to get a job.

Over the years I eventually got married and had two kids, rented a house and things were good. Even got a good tv via tax returns. Then the recession hit. We had to move out and live with my folks for awhile until we got an apartment that was in subsidized housing with some help via a chairty organization. There was only one 3 bedroom apartment available....which happened to be the only one that wasn't subsidized because it was originally the managers apartment. Rent is 750/month. Which we used our tax returns to pay for a years worth of rent. Now we have two cars and the same tv. One car for my wife and one for me so we can do our own respective things.

This is my life for the last 16 years in its most simplest form. I am poor. Yet my family is provided for. Do I not deserve a tv and 2 cars just because I am poor?
 
Kal'Stang said:
When I was 20 yrs old I would walk to work sometimes thumbing a ride. My job was 25 miles from where I lived with my folks. I did that for 3 months, part of which was in the winter. Plus I had the swing shift so by the time I got off I had to walk home in the dark...rarely did anyone stop to pick me up. Then I was able to get an apartment in town and a car which widened my ability to get a job.

Over the years I eventually got married and had two kids, rented a house and things were good. Even got a good tv via tax returns. Then the recession hit. We had to move out and live with my folks for awhile until we got an apartment that was in subsidized housing with some help via a chairty organization. There was only one 3 bedroom apartment available....which happened to be the only one that wasn't subsidized because it was originally the managers apartment. Rent is 750/month. Which we used our tax returns to pay for a years worth of rent. Now we have two cars and the same tv. One car for my wife and one for me so we can do our own respective things.

This is my life for the last 16 years in its most simplest form. I am poor. Yet my family is provided for. Do I not deserve a tv and 2 cars just because I am poor?
Click to expand...

You walked 25 miles to work each day? That's like 4 hours each way! Jesus man.
 
Kal'Stang said:
When I was 20 yrs old I would walk to work sometimes thumbing a ride. My job was 25 miles from where I lived with my folks. I did that for 3 months, part of which was in the winter. Plus I had the swing shift so by the time I got off I had to walk home in the dark...rarely did anyone stop to pick me up. Then I was able to get an apartment in town and a car which widened my ability to get a job.

Over the years I eventually got married and had two kids, rented a house and things were good. Even got a good tv via tax returns. Then the recession hit. We had to move out and live with my folks for awhile until we got an apartment that was in subsidized housing with some help via a chairty organization. There was only one 3 bedroom apartment available....which happened to be the only one that wasn't subsidized because it was originally the managers apartment. Rent is 750/month. Which we used our tax returns to pay for a years worth of rent. Now we have two cars and the same tv. One car for my wife and one for me so we can do our own respective things.

This is my life for the last 16 years in its most simplest form. I am poor. Yet my family is provided for. Do I not deserve a tv and 2 cars just because I am poor?
Click to expand...

I've seen both sides of the argument.
Where there are 2 (or more arguments) for and against the poor being subsidized through various means and what it actually means to be poor.

I think folks who are poor and generally make the right choices, even with financial hardship, should reward themselves.
On the other hand, I've seen people who make more than me, make the wrong choices (repeatedly) and get state aid, have no consequences other than more state aid.

We do have a messed up social system.
 
Wake said:
Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income - Yahoo! News

To me I find this to be shocking. In my opinion, I would think the right is primarily to blame, for catering to the wealthy.

As they say, "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer."
Click to expand...

Why do you say it is the fault of "the Right" - as opposed to the fault of incumbents in Washington? Obama exempted the 6 WalMart heirs from healthcare requirements - those each worth from $14 BILLION to $25 BILLION each. When Obama and the Democrats controlled both sides of Congress - what did they change??? NOTHING.
Same breaks for the rich. Some special treatments. Same lobbyists. They changed nothing, when they could have changed everything.
When it comes to insider trading, taking lobbyist money, voting on tax exemptions etc - BOTH sides DO EXACTLY THE SAME VOTING.

I stopped buying "the big lie" that there is a partisan fight at all. They say opposite words, but end up voting/doing exactly the same at every substantive level. WITH NO DEBATE, BOTH SIDES agree to INCREASE the massive military budget - despite the wars supposedly over - and BOTH voted in that bill to decrease civil rights.

What is the different between "the left" and "the right" in ANY REAL terms? Other than words? Both sides end up "compromising" to give the other side what they want - meaning the argue furiously in a trillion words - then agree to vote exactly the same, claiming the other side made them do it.

It's sickening.
 
Last edited:
Harry Guerrilla said:
Why?
I used to ride a bike 10 miles to work each day and put in a 10 hour shift.
Summer/Winter, rain, snow, etc.

Some people have the fortitude to do this and others don't.

Edit: It actually didn't snow during that time. :)
Click to expand...

Big difference between riding a bike 10 miles, and walking 25 every day.
 
and as for why, because people lie. And that is not believable.

If you wanna believe that used to skip to work 40 miles one way and it rained every day. And it was -60 degrees. the wind often blew me back to my house multiple times and i had to fend off rabid wolves.
 
muciti said:
Big difference between riding a bike 10 miles, and walking 25 every day.
Click to expand...

True enough but your body gets used to it.

One guy at work used to pull double shifts, multiple days a week.
16 hour days, in a spray booth, with full body coveralls and the temp is usually no less than 85*F, because it's located next to a propane oven.

People put themselves through all sorts of stuff, to make ends meet.
 
muciti said:
and as for why, because people lie. And that is not believable.

If you wanna believe that used to skip to work 40 miles one way and it rained every day. And it was -60 degrees. the wind often blew me back to my house multiple times and i had to fend off rabid wolves.
Click to expand...

In Kal's defense, I've been interacting with him for a couple of years now and I've yet to see anything from him that would discredit his claim.
He's pretty consistent and honest.
 
One guy at work used to pull double shifts, multiple days a week.
16 hour days, in a spray booth, with full body coveralls and the temp is usually no less than 85*F, because it's located next to a propane oven.
Click to expand...


I have put in 12 hour shifts and seen plenty of people work longer. I have no problem believing that. That guy is getting paid. Thats not quite the same as walking (unpaid) for 8-10 hours a day to work an 8 hour shift.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom